Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-28-2008, 01:43 AM   #1
Senior Member
DJey's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 286
Sigma 24-60mm or 16-45mm or LX3

Hi guys,

I can get one of them this Christmas, which do you think should I get..
I'm leaning on the 24-60mm because its constant 2.8 but the wide of the 16-45mm is a temptation..

Interest:

Landscape
Portraiture

Or Get the LX3 as my everyday camera!

Jay2

11-28-2008, 09:59 AM   #2
Veteran Member
gnaztee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Cornelius, OR
Posts: 753
I have owned both the DA 16-45 and the LX3 (briefly), but not the 24-60. Pluses and minuses for me:

LX3 - Good
-has macro built in, in case you need it when you're walking around
-small, portable
-good image quality (for a p&s)
-some cool in-camera digital filters/processing
-big LCD for shooting street stuff discreetly
-f2-2.8 lens
-zoom range is equivalent in field-of-view to the 16-45, but in a much smaller package

LX3 Bad
-Image quality doesn't compare to DSLR
-ISO over 400 is a bit sketchy
-Difficult to get shallow depth of field, something I love in a DSLR
-using it as your everyday camera means you're using your Pentax glass less than 1/2 the time (one reason I got the K-m instead of the LX3...now I can use all of my glass, that each costs as much or more than the LX3)

The DA 16-45 is a very good lens. For me, it came down to how much bulk I could tolerate to get the image quality I wanted. The K10D with a zoom lens to walk around a new city on a trip is a bit much for me. The K-m with a DA Ltd is just about right for me. The LX3 is nice, but I couldn't use my glass with it and I didn't want to sacrifice IQ.

Hope this helps!

Todd
11-28-2008, 10:42 AM   #3
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 173
I love my 16-45. Most of my shots fall within the 16-24 range, with the majority full wide at 16.

IMO f/4 is fast enough at the wider end of the spectrum, and when I need more speed I switch to my FA50.
11-28-2008, 11:54 AM   #4
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by DJey Quote
Interest:

Landscape
Portraiture
For landscape, the LX3 seems a fine choice - good focal length range and you wouldn't be pushing the high ISO range much. For portraiture, though, the zoom range is way too short, though, maxing out at the APS-C equivalent of 40mm. So really, it seems to me the LX3 would be a landscape & indoor candids camera mostly. It wouldn't help witht eh portraiture. Nor would the 16-45. The 24-60 would sort of get you part way there, but really wouldn't be ideal, either. 60mm is just *barely* getting into good portrait focal length territory.

Really, I could see trying to decide between the 24-60 and 16-45 if you're looking for an upgrade to the kit lens for general purpose use. But consider: for landscape, you're generally wanting to stop down to f/8, and the kit lens (which I asusme you have) is already pretty darned good at f/8. And the 24-60, if you're thinking of it as replacement for the kit lens, is going to be pretty limiting at the wide end when it comes to landscape. So maybe consider the 16-45 as a way of improving your landscape options somewhat.

The LX3's main advantage is the small size, so if you're looking for ways of getting that you might also consider the DA21 to turn your current DSLR into a very good relatively small wide angle camera.

But not knowing what you already have, if I were to guess all you've got is the kit lens, I'd personally call that good for general purpose and landscape ue nd concentrate on getting something that really would work well for portraits. The DA70 seems worth considering in the same price range. Or maybe a 28-75/2.8, which of course is even more limiting than the 24-60 for landscape, but as a portrait / low light supplement to the kit lens, could be very useful.

11-28-2008, 04:25 PM   #5
Veteran Member
AndrewG NY's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Chappaqua, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 679
Food for thought. When I want to go small, I sometimes use a more compact zoom and prime combination--such as (I have done both):

a) FA20-35 f/4 + a prime or two - pick from FA43, FA50, or DA70--don't need all three, just one or two.
b) DA21 + FA28-70 f/4. (another good, compact alternative - FA 28-105 f/3.2-4.5)

I have the 24-60 but don't use it much, largely because of its bulk (though it's fairly compact for a f/2.8 zoom). I prefer the FA 24-90 as its a little smaller and has the (important for me) portrait range of 60-90. The DA 16-45 is nice but is a little short so you might want a DA70, DA50-200 or DA55-300 to go with it.

The LX3 looks nice but I wish they'd given it a zoom range of something like 28-90 instead. I guess they improved a bit on the somewhat similar Ricoh GX-100 though. It's too bad that the Canon Powershot G10 has a slower lens and is a little bit overstuffed in the pixel density department.
11-29-2008, 12:29 AM   #6
Senior Member
DJey's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 286
Original Poster
Thanks guys!

@ Marc,

I do have the 50mm F1.7 for my Portrait and Low light.. I sometimes do some events and found out that the kit lens lack sharpness. So I thought of the 16-45mm for the sharpness base on reviews..

Thanks!
11-29-2008, 02:56 AM   #7
Senior Member
DJey's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 286
Original Poster
Decided to take the DA 16-45mm F4 because I have a trip tom... Hope its gonna be a great lens..

Somehow my mind is at ease now.. No more bugling which one to get.. hehehe..

Thanks!

Jay2
11-29-2008, 04:35 AM   #8
Pentaxian
Mike.P's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: South Coast .. UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,758
I have both the 16-45mm and the 24-60mm.
Given the choice I would pick the 16-45mm every time .. its just a nice lens.

11-29-2008, 09:11 AM   #9
Veteran Member
heliphoto's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Region 5
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,540
QuoteOriginally posted by DJey Quote
Decided to take the DA 16-45mm F4 because I have a trip tom... Hope its gonna be a great lens..

Somehow my mind is at ease now.. No more bugling which one to get.. hehehe..

Thanks!

Jay2
Sounds like a good choice DJey... (and my 24-60 sold - though there are two more in the marketplace right now ). I know I missed the wide end with the 24-60 and the 16-45 constantly gets high marks from people who own it. Enjoy.
11-29-2008, 10:54 AM   #10
Veteran Member
deejjjaaaa's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: steel city / rust belt
Posts: 2,046
QuoteOriginally posted by gnaztee Quote
that each costs as much or more than the LX3
actually LX3 costs twice as much as Sigma 24-60/2.8 and more (albeit not twice) than 16-45/4.0
11-29-2008, 10:59 AM   #11
Veteran Member
deejjjaaaa's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: steel city / rust belt
Posts: 2,046
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
60mm is just *barely* getting into good portrait focal length territory.
apparently Pentax was wrong making new 55/1.4 as a crop replacement for a FF 85/1.4 FOV... come on - 50/1.4 makes good portraits, so there is not reason why zoom ending @ 60mm can't make it even better from the FOV prospective...

Last edited by deejjjaaaa; 11-29-2008 at 11:28 AM.
11-29-2008, 11:27 AM   #12
Veteran Member
deejjjaaaa's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: steel city / rust belt
Posts: 2,046
QuoteOriginally posted by gnaztee Quote
-using it as your everyday camera means you're using your Pentax glass less than 1/2 the time
not exactly - while LX3 is not a camera that fits nicely into every pocket (unless you are XXXL in a baggy pants - see the lens housing on its body) many (but not all of course) people will be able to take it to more places... my *istDL is small enough, however I find it still too big to carry to some gatherings or sometimes too obtrusive for the environment even w/ a small fixed lens...

LX3 (black 'd be better) vs *ist DL (unfortunately w/ A50/1.2 mounted w/ hood on it - but you can imagine much smaller DA 40/2.8 instead)

11-29-2008, 01:03 PM   #13
Veteran Member
gnaztee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Cornelius, OR
Posts: 753
You're right, except...

...the OP specifically said "or the LX3 as my everyday camera." So, my original point is correct: if you use the LX3 as your everyday camera, you will be using your pentax glass (at least) less than half the time -- hence, the meaning of "everyday" I was not commenting on size or obtrusiveness.
12-06-2008, 07:14 PM   #14
Senior Member
DJey's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Philippines
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 286
Original Poster
Thanks guys.. Here's a sample shot taken from my new lens DA 16-45mm F4..





More here
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
16-45mm, k-mount, lx3, pentax lens, sigma 24-60mm, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wanted - Acquired: Sigma 24-60mm 2.8 EX DG lowspark86 Sold Items 4 11-22-2010 04:26 PM
Sigma 24-60mm F2.8 DG EX bladerunneruk Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 14 12-21-2009 03:16 PM
Help me decide: Sigma 24-60mm f2.8 OR Sigma 24-70mm f2.8 Macro NicholasN Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 01-21-2009 03:50 PM
Sigma 20-60mm F2.8 Denis Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 05-06-2008 09:50 PM
Sigma 24-60MM F2.8 EX Rmpjr7 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 7 04-09-2008 04:57 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:53 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top